this post was submitted on 07 Jan 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)

politics

26689 readers
2119 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] cultsuperstar@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Weren't a lot of them installed by the GOP leading up to Trump's presidency? I know the GOP was pushing through a lot if confirmations when they had control of the senate.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Curiously enough, the plurality were appointed by Obama.

Not even the first time Obama appointees cut far-right idiots and assholes some slack. Still found it fucking hilarious that Eric Holder couldn't find anyone in the Bush Administration worth prosecuting. Particularly when Bush goons like Ron DeSantis and Chris Christie would move right on over to state government positions in subsequent years.

[–] cultsuperstar@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

If I remember correctly (and I admit I'm probably not lol), is that when Obama would nominate a judge and the GOP would say no until he nominated someone they wanted?

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago

Merrick Garland was Lindsey Graham's stated preference for Obama's SCOTUS pick and Graham still blackballed him when Obama made the nomination.

[–] rivermonster@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

This was ABSOLUTELY the case in the fall of the Weimar Republic. One of the very notable things was that as political violence increased, punishment and severity of punishment of the left also dramatically increased. Meanwhile the fascists were often let off or given only a slap on the wrists. EXACTLY like Jan 6th.

Tolerance of the intolerant will get you, and everyone you loved killed. Never go easy on Nazis.

A short easy read: https://www.heraldnet.com/opinion/comment-excusing-violence-as-patriotic-has-proved-dangerous/

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago

You can draw a straight line between degree of sentencing and personal wealth/prestige in the Jan 6th prosecutions. The Right/Left dichotomy is far more often a simple Rich/Poor one, with better representation and more forgiving verdicts handed out to people with the means to pay for them.

Tolerance of the intolerant will get you, and everyone you loved killed.

We're so far past the idea of the Tolerance Paradox. You get to show tolerance when you have the power to perform otherwise. But these are all petite bourgeois hacks keeping it chill inside the good ole' boys club. None of us are issuing these verdicts. None of us have any kind of say as to how these insurrection cases are handled.

[–] books@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Probably cause they are all white.

[–] doingless@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Probably because their crimes paled compared to riots in major cities in the previous few years. How many of the people who took over Seattle are in prison? There was federal property there.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago

their crimes paled compared to riots

Does a riot

Okay, yes, sure. But it wasn't like when THOSE PEOPLE do riots.